Why Were We Lied to By the BBC ?

[jassi]

That's fine if it is your opinion ... it simply does not fit the facts which basically have nothing whatsoever to do with whether Mr Smith's evidence is credible or not.
In fact it is my opinion that it all seems to be more about an investigative journalist and her opinion than anything to do with Mr Smith at all.

Those accusations made require their provenance to be affirmed, or the allegations mean nothing at all. The journalist must have recorded all her interviews and correspondence.  So why doesn't she share?

I wonder why some 'expert' in FOI hasn't fired one off to the BBC to 'investigate' why the Panorama programme was edited ... must be at least one licence payer out there who gives a damn.  Or maybe not.

How difficult is it for provenance to be delivered.  A quick reminder of the OP for this thread ...



Louth man Martin Smith has confirmed he remains 60-80% sure he saw Gerry McCann carrying a child on the night Madeleine disappeared. Police are keen to talk to the man he saw, who has yet to come forward and identify himself. My report is in @VillageMagIRE today #McCann

https://twitter.com/gemmaod1/status/959745836145135616

It would appear that Miss O'Doherty approached the BBC and asked why they misled the public over the Smith sighting. The BBC admitted their mistake and have issued a retraction within the iPlayer edition of their 10th Anniversary programme.

Perhaps someone has.  These things take time.

[pathfinder73]

This is what the waiter says -


He served Russell and shortly thereafter, he was alerted to strange movements in the restaurant perimeters. He refers to the movements of two men from said group? David Payne and Matthew, who appeared to be searching the gardens the areas near the bar. The witness went to the esplanade zone and saw that the table that had previously been occupied by nine adults was now occupied only by the older woman, called Dianne Webster. It was also at this time that he saw that Russell's food was only half eaten and that the others had all finished their dinner.

So his meal was half eaten.

So how long do you think it took before Russells meal was half eaten?    Five minutes?    Plus Dianne was sat at the table for what another five minutes?   That would be almost gone 10 o'clock in my calculations.   Then Gerry was seen searching around the pool by a waiter.    So sorry Smithman was not Gerry.

You have nothing to worry about then.

Erm, my food had arrived, well my food had arrived I think by this point. And, and then Kate, erm, erm, returned, erm, obviously Jane wasn’t there but the rest of us were still there, and she came through and, you know, into the portal, I didn’t see her arrive, but the first thing really we recall then is, erm, is, is Kate shouting across from the, from the reception area and perhaps she didn’t come particularly close.
http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/RUSSELL-OBRIEN_ROGATORY.htm

[Brietta]

Theres's something missing here.......

Ah yes, it's this bit......

"or supply sufficient detail for an efit."

The cite for that part of your claim is missing.

Was it abducted?

What is truly risible is the fuss my post has engendered with demands for cites.  Yet not a single cite is required from the investigative journalist Gemma O'Doherty for any claim she has made.


He has been contacted by numerous tabloid press looking for stories. He has been contacted by Mr Brian Kennedy who is supporting the McCann family to take part in a photo fit exercise. He has given no stories or helped in any photo fits.
http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/MARTIN_SMITH.htm

[Wonderfulspam]

What is truly risible is the fuss my post has engendered with demands for cites.  Yet not a single cite is required from the investigative journalist Gemma O'Doherty for any claim she has made.


He has been contacted by numerous tabloid press looking for stories. He has been contacted by Mr Brian Kennedy who is supporting the McCann family to take part in a photo fit exercise. He has given no stories or helped in any photo fits.
http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/MARTIN_SMITH.htm

Now, that's somewhat different to...."or supply sufficient detail for an efit", really, isn't it.

If you're not too keen on being asked for cites you can't actually provide in order to support your assertions, 
I suggest you might try sticking to facts.

Thanks.

[Brietta]

Now, that's somewhat different to...."or supply sufficient detail for an efit", really, isn't it.

If you're not too keen on being asked for cites you can't actually provide in order to support your assertions, 
I suggest you might try sticking to facts.

Thanks.

Did you read Mr Smith's statement?  what information could he have supplied to enable an efit?  so make the logical deduction from that ... starting with Mr Smith's assertion that he definitely didn't look like Robert Murat.

 

[G-Unit]

That's fine if it is your opinion ... it simply does not fit the facts which basically have nothing whatsoever to do with whether Mr Smith's evidence is credible or not.
In fact it is my opinion that it all seems to be more about an investigative journalist and her opinion than anything to do with Mr Smith at all.

Those accusations made require their provenance to be affirmed, or the allegations mean nothing at all. The journalist must have recorded all her interviews and correspondence.  So why doesn't she share?

I wonder why some 'expert' in FOI hasn't fired one off to the BBC to 'investigate' why the Panorama programme was edited ... must be at least one licence payer out there who gives a damn.  Or maybe not.

How difficult is it for provenance to be delivered.  A quick reminder of the OP for this thread ...



Louth man Martin Smith has confirmed he remains 60-80% sure he saw Gerry McCann carrying a child on the night Madeleine disappeared. Police are keen to talk to the man he saw, who has yet to come forward and identify himself. My report is in @VillageMagIRE today #McCann

https://twitter.com/gemmaod1/status/959745836145135616

It would appear that Miss O'Doherty approached the BBC and asked why they misled the public over the Smith sighting. The BBC admitted their mistake and have issued a retraction within the iPlayer edition of their 10th Anniversary programme.

Did you believe the reports in the MSM that Smith had changed his mind? There was no provenance for them.

[Wonderfulspam]

Did you read Mr Smith's statement?  what information could he have supplied to enable an efit?  so make the logical deduction from that ... starting with Mr Smith's assertion that he definitely didn't look like Robert Murat.

Yes.

He could have supplied information such as, the person didn't have glasses, or moustache or beard, & had short brown hair in a basic male cut, for starters.

Perhaps when they put him back in the moment, like they did with Jane, he could later have remembered more.

Granted, he perhaps didn't have the same power of recall as Ms Tanner, her being able to observe, from a distance of 5 metres, the individual bits of hair coming from creche-dads head.

I can't even begin to imagine why Henri Exton might have been sceptical about her evidence.

[Alice Purjorick]

Did you believe the reports in the MSM that Smith had changed his mind? There was no provenance for them.

As I  recall the whole "Smith changed his mind thingy" was driven on here by Charon trapping off. As he was saying what supporters wanted to hear they did not question it [no surprise there].

What we are now looking at is whether, on comparison of two beeb videos there is a bit missing from one that isn't on the other. As Worshipnderfulspam demonstrated this to be so a few posts ago ....... join up the dots.
Hint: whether there is a cite for Ms O'Doherty talking to anyone becomes an irrelevance.

[misty]

If Jane Tanner had actually passed by the man carrying the child on Rua DAdSilva then the evidence she provided would have had far more substance. In fact, she may have even recognised the MW holidaymaker, saved the PJ time & the investigation could have moved on in another direction had the Smiths still come forward.

[Brietta]

Did you believe the reports in the MSM that Smith had changed his mind? There was no provenance for them.

What I may or may not think is irrelevant.  I am not making a living from it ... apparently Gemma O'Doherty does as an investigative journalist. 
She has already told us about Martin Smith and the BBC therefore there can be no question of her having to protect her sources.  They are already revealed.  So why the shyness about letting us in on what convinced her?  Didn't she keep a record I wonder.

[Wonderfulspam]

As I  recall the whole "Smith changed his mind thingy" was driven on here by Charon trapping off. As he was saying what supporters wanted to hear they did not question it [no surprise there].

What we are now looking at is whether, on comparison of two beeb videos there is a bit missing from one that isn't on the other. As Worshipnderfulspam demonstrated this to be so a few posts ago ....... join up the dots.
Hint: whether there is a cite for Ms O'Doherty talking to anyone becomes an irrelevance.

I just compared the two running times.

The difference between the two is, the edited version runs around 3 to 4 seconds shorter than the original.

Coincidently, this is roughly the same amount of time it took for Richard Bilton to say:

'The Smiths themselves now believe they saw someone else'

How Extraordinary!

[jassi]

What I may or may not think is irrelevant.  I am not making a living from it ... apparently Gemma O'Doherty does as an investigative journalist. 
She has already told us about Martin Smith and the BBC therefore there can be no question of her having to protect her sources.  They are already revealed.  So why the shyness about letting us in on what convinced her? Didn't she keep a record I wonder.

That's for her to know and you to wonder.   

[Alice Purjorick]

What I may or may not think is irrelevant.  I am not making a living from it ... apparently Gemma O'Doherty does as an investigative journalist. 
She has already told us about Martin Smith and the BBC therefore there can be no question of her having to protect her sources.  They are already revealed.  So why the shyness about letting us in on what convinced her?  Didn't she keep a record I wonder.

I'll pass on that one . It requires no skill...

[Alice Purjorick]

I just compared the two running times.

The difference between the two is, the edited version runs around 3 to 4 seconds shorter than the original.

Coincidently, this is roughly the same amount of time it took for Richard Bilton to say:

'The Smiths themselves now believe they saw someone else'

How Extraordinary!

Next rumour from The Brill Building:
Duarte Levy has a job in the cutting room of Panorama.................

[misty]

Confirmation that the Smith's 2 efits were compiled with the assistance of Martin & PETER Smith.